Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Syndicated loan wikipedia , lookup
Debtors Anonymous wikipedia , lookup
Systemic risk wikipedia , lookup
Securitization wikipedia , lookup
Government debt wikipedia , lookup
Financialization wikipedia , lookup
Debt settlement wikipedia , lookup
Credit rationing wikipedia , lookup
Debt collection wikipedia , lookup
Interest rate ceiling wikipedia , lookup
First Report on the Public Credit wikipedia , lookup
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Nondepository Supervision 1801 L Street NW, Room 513-H Washington, DC 20036 VIA EMAIL RE: Defining Larger Participants in Certain Markets for Consumer Financial Products and Services Markets [Docket N. CFPB-HQ-2011-2] We are writing to associate ourselves with the more detailed comments on the “Larger Participants” docket that are being sent in by Americans for Financial Reform, the National Consumer Law Center, the Consumer Federation of America, U.S. PIRG and other AFR members. The rule is critical in determining which “non-banks” -- in addition to the statutory authority already granted over residential mortgage, private education, and payday lenders -- will be subject to the Bureau’s full supervisory authority under the Dodd-Frank Act. The statute provides a flexible framework for the Bureau to define its supervisory authority: The initial “larger participant” rule resulting from this proceeding will not impose new substantive requirements on non-banks. Rather, using a flexible set of tools in the act, it will allow CFPB to do two things: (1) define the criteria the CFPB will use to determine who is a “larger participant” in a given market; and (2) outline the specific markets for which the larger participants will fall under the scope of the Bureau’s supervisory authority. We believe that the Bureau can assess which non-banks pose potential risks to consumers in a variety of ways. The best way to protect consumers over time -- and ensure even-handed regulation -- is to define “larger” non-bank participants in a way that is flexible and not overly prescriptive: We believe that it is crucial that the Bureau employ a flexible, broad standard that can respond to changes in the marketplace and ensure that risky actors do not evade supervision. The Bureau does not need to examine every participant who falls within the definition of “larger participant” under the rule; it can assess risk when determining who to actually supervise and how often. As just one example of the kinds of markets that contain important larger participants, we strongly suggest that the CFPB separate markets for credit reports into at least three categories— a market for full-service credit reports as dominated by the so-called Big Three, a market for specialized credit reports and a market for credit scores. Our organizations regularly hear from consumers about their disputes with credit bureaus. Consumers also are concerned with the regulation of credit scores, which are largely derived from these often-mistaken credit reports. Finally, consumers also are affected by decisions of specialized credit bureaus that determine whether you can open a bank account or obtain medical insurance, for example. Decisions by all of these firms affect consumers in their daily lives. The larger participant firms in credit reporting should not be limited to the Big Three. It should be obvious that these socalled Big Three credit bureaus are multi-billion dollar, multi-national firms operating in nearly every state and affecting nearly every consumer. Yet the so-called specialty credit reporting agencies (perhaps further divided into several sub-markets) and credit scoring firms also function as national gatekeepers in their own markets. Further, some of these firms may be “larger” than they appear as they are often part of massive multi-state or multinational conglomerates. Our organizations also regularly hear from consumers regarding the other markets proposed in the Advance Notice: Markets identified in this Notice for possible inclusion are: debt collection, consumer credit and related activities, money transmitting, check cashing and related activities, prepaid cards, and debt relief services. We urge the Bureau to reserve the right to supervise all types of larger participants in all of the markets identified in the Notice. Serious consumer abuses that violate federal law have occurred in each of these markets. The initial rule should cover not just non-banks that sell products or services in these sectors, but those that market, arrange, package, and develop these services and products, provide important technology that affects the terms or risks of products or provide credit screening profiles of consumers to other businesses, whether or not the non-bank in question has direct contact with consumers. To be as inclusive as possible and to ensure coverage of all areas that may pose risk to consumers, the rule should break down the categories of activity further to reflect the diverse players within each field, just as proposed above for credit bureaus For example, in debt collection, actors may include debt collection law firms, collection agencies, bulk debt buyers, etc., which are different in size, practices and impact on the consumer. “Consumer credit and related activities” is also a very broad category, including car title lenders, pawn shops and other non-bank consumer lenders. “Debt relief” services include debt settlement companies, for-profit debt management companies and not-for-profit credit counselors, as well as entities that perform both debt management and debt settlement. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments urging a broad, flexible application of the “Larger Participants” rule as the most effective way to protect consumers. Again, we write to associate ourselves with the more detailed comments on the “Larger Participants” docket that are being sent in by affiliated and colleague national organizations led by Americans for Financial Reform, the National Consumer Law Center, the Consumer Federation of America, U.S. PIRG and other AFR members. The problems detailed comments address are problems that our staff deal with in their daily interactions with members, clients and other consumers. These problems well warrant the CFPB taking care to ensure that it has all the regulatory tools in its toolbox possible, so it can flexibly and responsively protect consumers from current, future and as yet unanticipated problems in the financial marketplace. Sincerely, Jon Fox, California Public Interest Research Group (CalPIRG), [email protected]